Analytics and the Kings

Starter

The Kings are projected to do poorly next year. I think a lot of the problem had to do with sample size issues with our players.

For example:
If you take Fox’s 3 point shooting percentage from last year he looks pretty good. But if you average Fox with the previous year, he by the numbers would be a below average shooter.

You have the same problem with Bogi in reverse. Bogi’s percentages were good year 1 and pretty poor year 2.

Bagley improved from beginning to end. Is he a 14 point per game player or 19 point per game player.

I think the second problem is analytics will model guys after other players. But even this approach breaks down given Joeger’s approach to limiting rookies their first year. It’s impossible to separate out year 1 to year 2 growth versus Joeger loosening the reigns.

Starter

All-Star

If Bagley is as good as we think he is, and if Barnes can improve his chemistry with the team I do not see any reason why we can't be a playoff team. We have the player for player talent and 1 on 1 I would compare our team with any other in the league. As long as the chemistry improves I foresee playoffs.

Hall of Famer

The Kings are projected to do poorly next year. I think a lot of the problem had to do with sample size issues with our players.

For example:
If you take Fox’s 3 point shooting percentage from last year he looks pretty good. But if you average Fox with the previous year, he by the numbers would be a below average shooter.

You have the same problem with Bogi in reverse. Bogi’s percentages were good year 1 and pretty poor year 2.

Bagley improved from beginning to end. Is he a 14 point per game player or 19 point per game player.

I think the second problem is analytics will model guys after other players. But even this approach breaks down given Joeger’s approach to limiting rookies their first year. It’s impossible to separate out year 1 to year 2 growth versus Joeger loosening the reigns.

It's not good analytics if the "analyzer" simply averages Year 1 with Year 2 for a young player. That would just be dumb. It's the progression that's important. Looking at progression, Fox and Bagley look good, Bogs doesn't.

Starter

It's not good analytics if the "analyzer" simply averages Year 1 with Year 2 for a young player. That would just be dumb. It's the progression that's important. Looking at progression, Fox and Bagley look good, Bogs doesn't.

The cake is a lie.

Frankly, 40 wins would be a disappointment. We won 39 last year with everyone complaining about rotations and losing 4 games to the Warriors by a total of a dozen points. We should be gunning for 45 MINIMUM. Walton was hired to "take us to the next level" - if we aren't in the PO (even as an 8 seed) I think the "next level" has not been reached. The FO has set the expectation with their words and actions and I think this is their goal next year.

I wasn't a fan of the hiring but the FO seemed to be giddy about it. I can see the reasoning now and hope it works out the way they think it will. I'm ready to be on a playoff train again. It's been too long.

It’s hard to see 40-45 wins not being reasonable. They went 3-23 against the top 7 teams of Lakers, Clippers, Golden State, Portland, Houston, Utah and Denver and still won 39 games. Vlade has already proven he won’t tank even when he should and we have way less back to back disadvantaged games than last year.

Starter

It’s hard to see 40-45 wins not being reasonable. They went 3-23 against the top 7 teams of Lakers, Clippers, Golden State, Portland, Houston, Utah and Denver and still won 39 games. Vlade has already proven he won’t tank even when he should and we have way less back to back disadvantaged games than last year.

Starter

Frankly, 40 wins would be a disappointment. We won 39 last year with everyone complaining about rotations and losing 4 games to the Warriors by a total of a dozen points. We should be gunning for 45 MINIMUM. Walton was hired to "take us to the next level" - if we aren't in the PO (even as an 8 seed) I think the "next level" has not been reached. The FO has set the expectation with their words and actions and I think this is their goal next year.

I wasn't a fan of the hiring but the FO seemed to be giddy about it. I can see the reasoning now and hope it works out the way they think it will. I'm ready to be on a playoff train again. It's been too long.

45 wins is a successful season record-wise, but it may not even get them in the playoffs. - it wouldn't have this last season. The Kings will need to do MUCH better than 3-23 against top competition in the West to make the Playoffs. I'm thinking 12-14 or 11-15 at very least. That's a tall order with what was shown last year honestly. Yes the team has changed, but I don't see that as necessarily improving, more a 'wait-and-see'. It's not impossible, but seems unlikely. There would need to be the same kind of leap next year as from last year, which would be remarkable. Hopefully they don't get in a hole early in the season, but rather jump on the horse.

Starter

I dont know about 58 or 59 wins for any Pacific teams this year. Maybe the Clippers. The other teams I doubt. Warriors, may win in the low 50s. Lakers high 40s maybe, If James is injured for more than 25 games,, deep-six 'em. Kings could win 45, although 45 and no playoffs is still no playoffs unfortunately. Bagley must be consistently good for the team to stand a chance against top tier teams ahead of them.